Leadership has a sliding scale of quality or deception that is given by a person. There are great leaders known in history and some that have done more harm than good as well. I am going to review a case analysis of Sycamore Pharmaceuticals by Daft (2011). Within this study I will be giving advice, reasoning for and against, discuss possible reasoning of why I think the subjects Blake & Dominguez did what they did and for what cause. Let’s take a deeper look into my analytical point of view of Blake & Dominguez in the Sycamore Pharmaceuticals case. Taking the first leap to making the morally right decision in a situation that could ultimately affect a person’s own self-interest puts many people in that uncomfortable spot like Blake. It takes an act of extreme courage to stand up for good morale beliefs instead of allowing the greed for more money stand in the way of the people that could be potentially hurt by using the drug that isn’t doing what it claims to be doing. In our text it states that “a lack of courage is what allows greed and self-interest to overcome concern for the common good” (Daft,
2011). If I were able to advise Blake in this situation I would advise him to let the FDA representative know of the situation at hand, because when the information gets out all the people that were involved regardless of how much they knew they will be prosecuted right along with them.
My fiancé used to tell me stories of when he worked at the Oklahoma County
Sheriff’s office and different situations that he had been into. For example, he found out another detention officer had been passing contraband to inmates within the facility and had asked him not to tell anyone. In a situation like this all the other officers and civilian personnel are at risk due to any favors that might be done by this corrupted officer. In a study I found that “ethical leadership is in need for strong ethical culture, and the importance of trust and the ethical challenges that are facing our future leaders” (Darcy, 2010). This falls in line with Blake and
Dominguez and the situation that is laid before them on ethical and moral decision. The downfall of being straight forward would be that the company itself changes the information and makes it seem that Blake was the sole person behind it all and knew that the drug was doing harm and wanted money versus the morally right decision. Telling the FDA the truth would quite possible save hundreds of people from the harsh after effects from the drug itself and could stop a corrupted company from doing future harm. I believe that Blake needs to be discrete when he advises the FDA of what information he found. In a study I found that “a person acquires virtues by repetitively practicing them until they are developed into a habit and with education and self-learning their virtues are defined contextually” (Hackett, 2012). This could stop any changes or corruption along the information he found. Investigators could hack into the company’s databases and find any evidence they deem worthy of prosecuting this company. I believe he could use his family for that support to help boost his courage and give him that extra boost he might need to get over the fear he was feeling. I don’t think Blake knew at first that the information the company was giving him was false. Many people do things that their supervisors tell them to do not knowing that they could be led astray and the information that is being fed to them is completely false and inaccurate. In a study I found that it states that “character development can extend the work of the organization but it is unfortunate that ethics education and training in organizational settings